| 00:00:00 | IS A LITTLE BIT HARD TO UNDERSTAND AND MAYBE DR. |
| 00:00:03 | BARRASSO UNDERSTANDS IT, THE SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SAID THEY CAN FIND NO WAY TO IMPLEMENT IT, AFTER NEARLY TWO YEARS. |
| 00:00:13 | SO WHY WOULD THERE BE AN OBJECTION TO SENATOR THUNE'S -- SENATOR THUNE HAS JUST MOVED TO REPEAL THE CLASS ACT. |
| 00:00:22 | I MEAN, IF THEY TRIED FOR ALL OF THESE MONTHS SINCE THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL TO FIGURE POUT A WAY THEY CAN -- TO FIGURE OUT A WAY THEY CAN MEET THE JUDD GREGG PROVISO THAT REQUIRED 75-YEAR SUSTAINSABILITY, THEN ONE WOULD WONDER, ONE WOULD WONDER WHY -- I THOUGHT SHOWGHT WAS SHOUTING WAS ENOUGH -- ONE WOULD WONDER WHY WE WOULDN'T JUST GO AHEAD AND REPEAL IT. |
| 00:00:53 | AND IF THERE THERE IS A BETTER PROPOSAL, AS WE'VE ALL AGREED, TO ADDRESS THE LONG-TERM CARE ISSUE IN AMERICA, THEN WHY DON'T WE SIT DOWN AT THE DRAWING BOARD AND FIND A WAY TO CASH FOR CARE FOR PEOPLE WHO IN THEIR MOST VULNERABLE YEARS NEED GOVERNMENT SUBSTANCE? |
| 00:01:10 | I KNOW OF NO ONE IN THIS BODY WHO IS TOPPED A VIABLE, REASONABLE -- WHO IS OPPOSED TO A VIABLE, REASONABLE, FISCALLY SOUND LONG-TERM CARE PROGRAM. |
| 00:01:20 | THIS IS NOT IT. |
| 00:01:21 | THAT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE. |
| 00:01:22 | SO I WONDER WHY MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE WOULD WANT -- WOULD BE -- WOULD REDUCEREFUSE TO REPEAL IT UNLESS IT'S A DISTORTED PRIDE IN AUTHORSHIP. |
Mr. McCAIN. I say to my colleague, what is a little hard to understand--maybe Dr. Barrasso understands it--the Secretary of Health and Human Services said they can find no way to implement it, after nearly 2 years. So why would there be an objection to Senator Thune having just moved to repeal the CLASS Act? If they tried for all of these months since the passage of the bill to figure out a way they can meet the Judd Gregg proviso that required the 75-year sustainability, then one would wonder why--one would wonder why we would not just go ahead and repeal it. If there is a better proposal, as we have all agreed, to address the long-term care issue in America, then why don't we sit down at the drawing board and find a way to care for people who, in their most vulnerable years, need government assistance? I know of no one in this body who is opposed to a viable, reasonable, fiscally sound long-term care program. This is not it.
This is not it. It is not even close. So I wondered why my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would refuse to repeal it unless it is some distorted pride in authorship.